[PRCo] Re: The Rest of the World -Electric Rails - Britain

[Fred Schneider]

Number one .... this started out as a Pittsburgh file and I am as guilty of corrupting it as anyone.   Sorry guys but I don't think the world's door stops at the Allegheny County line.

Number two .... Industry managers always used something called a cost benefit analysis.   You put your dollars first where it got the biggest bang for the buck.    Politicians say any death is one death too many because the money doesn't come out of their pockets.   Lawyers will say any death is one death to many because they can take the money from some one else's pocket and make money doing it.  I think both of those are sad.

My personal view point is that we need to go back to a cost benefit analysis.   A freight railroad which runs a couple of trains a day needs to have very low priority.   If they don't have positive train control for the next 100 years, so what?   Do we spent a billions equipping hundreds of thousands of miles of track to save a few lives?   More people lose lives in the falling in the bath tub.   Why don't we pass a law making it illegal to bathe?   

The Southern Pacific - Amtrak line from San Jose down to Santa Barbara deserves to have a very low priority.  Yes you can slam a freight train into the Starlight but the chance of it happening there is marginal compared to other places and speeds are much lower there thus injuries will be much lower.   

The Northeast Corridor with passenger trains running on headways up to 15 minutes or shorter in the rush should have a and with Acela trains running at 100 mph or more mixing it up with commuter trains ... I think that should have the highest priority in the nation. 

Wouldn't it be cheaper to pass the trainmen and enginemen through a scanner to find their cell phones and take them away before the climb into the cab?   

Oh TIH ... You mean I won't be able to go swimming because of the chlorine in the pool?   Will breathing hot peppers in an Indian restaurant represent a TIH?   Can the govm't take away my hot peppers too?     


On Mar 9, 2011, at 10:45 PM, Dwight Long wrote:

> Fred
> 
> Positive Train Control, mandated by FRA for installation by 2015 on all pax carrying railroads and all rail lines carrying TIH products.  Subject of great controversy and protest by railways--they say the cost benefit ratio is insufficient to justify it and FRA says any death is one too many.
> 
> Now I suppose you will ask me to translate TIH?   Toxic Inhalation Hazard.  Typical examples:  chlorine, anhydrous ammonia.
> 
> Dwight
>  ----- Original Message ----- 
>  From: Fred Schneider 
>  To: pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org 
>  Sent: Wednesday, 09 March, 2011 20:17
>  Subject: [PRCo] Re: The Rest of the World -Electric Rails - Britain
> 
> 
>  Translate PTC.
> 
> 
>  On Mar 9, 2011, at 7:11 PM, Dwight Long wrote:
> 
>> Fred
>> 
>> It will be interesting to see if the same requirements are maintained after the successful installation of PTC.
>> 
>> Dwight
>> 
>> ----- Original Message ----- 
>> From: Fred Schneider 
>> To: pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org 
>> Sent: Wednesday, 09 March, 2011 11:45
>> Subject: [PRCo] Re: The Rest of the World -Electric Rails - Britain
>> 
>> 
>> Yes, Dwight, but not the buff strength issues.    Isn't it amazing that in Germany, they can run freight trains and 180 mph passenger trains on the same tracks with urban streetcars because they put their emphasis on making sure things don't come together.
>> 
>> We put our emphasis on making sure if they come together, the cars won't crush but people will go flying into the end walls.
>> 
>> Do you mind if I simply shake my head in disbelief? 
>> 
>> Notice the locomotive in the siding next to the light rail car in the video:    
>> 
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zke_s7r7OJY
>> 
>> The cars are low voltage DC for city use, high voltage AC for use on the national network.   They are used in both Karlsruhe and Saarbrucken.   I remember when the new cars for Saarbrucken were delivered, enginemen were simply put in the cabs at the factory and they run across Germany to the customer!   
>> 
>> On Mar 9, 2011, at 9:59 AM, Dwight Long wrote:
>> 
>>> Fred
>>> 
>>> The FRA is hardly "out of the picture" on the River Line.  It is they who mandate temporal separation where vehicles possessing less than FRA specs, buff strength in particular, are used non-exclusively on railways.
>>> 
>>> Dwight
>>> 
>>> ----- Original Message ----- 
>>> From: Fred Schneider 
>>> To: pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org 
>>> Sent: Tuesday, 08 March, 2011 17:52
>>> Subject: [PRCo] Re: The Rest of the World -Electric Rails - Britain
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> APTA is official?   Britain has their own definition.   Each politician has his idea?   San Diego calls it a trolley.   Russ Jackson tells me that light rail has to be capable of moving in street traffic.   But if we make a mistake and say commuter rail, then the FRA jumps in and claims jurisdiction instead of the FTA in this country ... that is why the Austin project didn't get off the ground for over a year after the planned opening date.   You see it was light rail running as commuter rail on a national railroad ... but if you call it light rail (like New Jersey Transit's River line), then you keep the Federal Railroad Administration out of the picture and their buff strength requirements are not applicable when you build cars.   You only have to provide temporal separation between trains and light rail cars.   You confused?   Why shouldn't you be?  
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Mar 8, 2011, at 3:47 PM, Herb Brannon wrote:
>>> 
>>>> FYI, the official definitions for all modes of public transport, at least
>>>> in North America, are those definitions set forth by the American Public
>>>> Transportation Association (APTA) through the APTA Standards Development
>>>> Program.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 12:42, Fred Schneider <fwschneider at comcast.net>wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> One of the guys who got this wanted to engage me in a contest over the
>>>>> definition of light rail.   I refused because it is always in the mind of
>>>>> the beholder and in this case, the politician.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Whatever you call it, I'm simply amazed at the passenger counts.   My God,
>>>>> Derrick, 215,000 a day in one corner of the city.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Mar 7, 2011, at 11:18 PM, Derrick Brashear wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>>> LONDON'S DOCKLAND'S LIGHT RAIL, NOT A PART OF THE UNDERGROUND, WAS
>>>>> CREATED TO PROVIDE TRANSPORTATION TO THE EAST INDIA DOCKS IN AN ATTEMPT TO
>>>>> HELP REVITALIZE THE AREA AFTER CONTAINERIZATION SPELLED THE END OF THEIR
>>>>> ORIGINAL PURPOSE OF THE DOCKS ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE THAMES RIVER.   The
>>>>> first two lines from Bank Street and Tower Bridge to Isle of Dogs and from
>>>>> Stratford in East London southward to Isle of Dogs opened in 1987 using
>>>>> totally automated trains.   An extension eastward to Canningtown opened in
>>>>> 1994, one under the Thames to Greenwich and Lewisham saw service in 1996,
>>>>> three more extensions have opened by 2009 and another will open next year.
>>>>> Docklands is now transporting over 69 million riders a year which they
>>>>> modestly say exceeds 100,000 a day ... weekdays probably exceed 215,000.
>>>>> You will notice that those short two-section articulated trains of 1987 are
>>>>> past tense!    If you go to visit the Tower of London or Tower Bridge ...
>>>>> sneak away and look at this!
>>>>> .!
>>>>>> !
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Not only are they past tense, the equipment was sold when the tunnel
>>>>>> to Bank was built, apparently.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I rode it just over a week ago, from Bank to Lewisham. Seems more akin
>>>>>> to the airport people movers than to most light rail.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Derrick
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> -- 
>>>> Herb Brannon
>>>> In Cuyahoga Valley National Park
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>